Vehicle sharing systems—such as bike, scooter, and car sharing—play a key role in urban transportation, yet algorithmic pricing can lead to inequalities across locations. This paper studies how platforms can incorporate fairness into pricing decisions and the resulting outcomes. We propose two notions of fairness: price fairness, which limits price differences across locations, and access fairness, which equalizes the proportion of demand at each location that has access to the system, determined by affordability and availability. Using a stylized two-location model, the paper analyzes how fairness constraints affect platform revenue, consumer surplus, and social welfare. Although price fairness can sometimes increase consumer surplus at both locations, access fairness always reduces consumer surplus at both locations. A convex relaxation approach is developed for larger networks, and a case study using New York City data illustrates the tradeoffs between fairness and efficiency in practice.
Elmachtoub et al. (Fri,) studied this question.